Understanding the New Overtime Tax Policies in the Big Beautiful Bill
Is the Four-Day Workweek Really a Benefit? What’s the Tea in L&E?
Constangy Clips Ep. 11 - Summer Interns and Short-Term Workers: 3 Tips for Managing Seasonal Hires
New Executive Order Targets Disparate Impact Claims Nationwide - #WorkforceWednesday® - Employment Law This Week®
Navigating Contractor vs. Employee Classification
Work This Way: A Labor & Employment Law Podcast | Episode 45: New Leadership at Employment-Related Federal Agencies with David Dubberly of Maynard Nexsen
Employee Rights in Non-Unionized Workplaces: What's the Tea in L&E?
The Changing Landscape of EEOC Enforcement and Disparate Impact
Multijurisdictional Employers, Part 1: Independent Contractors vs. Employees
The Labor Law Insider: How Unions Are Navigating Trump 2.0, Part II
The Evolution of Equal Pay: Lessons From 9 to 5 — Hiring to Firing Podcast
The Labor Law Insider - How Unions Are Navigating Trump 2.0, Part I
Insider Strategies for Wage and Hour Compliance Success: One-on-One with Paul DeCamp
Work This Way: A Labor & Employment Law Podcast - Episode 42: Non-Compete Agreements with Mitchell Greggs of Maynard Nexsen
Stumbling Your Way Into a Union: Key Advice for Employers: What’s the Tea in L&E?
The Labor Law Insider: What's Next for Labor Law Under the Trump Administration, Part I
The Labor Law Insider: Student Athletes as Employees – Changes and Updates on the Dartmouth Case, NIL Litigation
#WorkforceWednesday®: Employment Law in 2025: A Look Ahead - Employment Law This Week®
#WorkforceWednesday®: 2024 Workforce Review - Top Labor and Employment Law Trends and Updates - Employment Law This Week®
Employment Law Now VIII-155 - The Trump 2.0 Impact on Labor and Employment Law
In the decision of WestJet Encore v ALPA, dated March 31, 2025, Arbitrator Kaplan held that a Canada Labour Code (the “Code”) provision which requires that pension (as well as health and disability) benefits continue to be...more
In a state as diverse and politically active as California, employers are bound to encounter clashing political expressions among employees this election cycle. Navigating these challenges and enforcing policies affecting the...more
The state of Texas is experiencing some Texas-size changes in discrimination and harassment law, including changes to where claims can be filed, who can sue whom, and what standards are used. Join Houston office managing...more
El Gobierno Nacional, a través del Ministerio del Trabajo, el 16 de marzo de 2023, radicó ante el Congreso de la República de Colombia el proyecto definitivo de Reforma Laboral, que pretende modificar varios artículos del...more
It’s hard to keep up with all the recent changes to labor and employment law. While the law always seems to evolve at a rapid pace, there have been an unprecedented number of changes for the past few years—and this past month...more
Since March 12, there have been 1,914 lawsuits (including 152 class actions) filed against employers due to alleged labor and employment violations related to the coronavirus....more
Ward v. United Airlines, Inc., 2020 WL 3495310 (Cal. S. Ct. 2020) - Plaintiffs are pilots and flight attendants for United Airlines, which is based outside California. Although they reside in California, they perform most...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: Among other things, AB 51 makes it unlawful for employers to impose arbitration agreements on employees as a condition of employment, even if employees are permitted to opt out. AB 51 was quickly challenged...more
On February 7, 2020, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California issued an order supporting its injunction of Assembly Bill 51 (AB 51), an expansive anti-arbitration law enacted in October, which was...more
From independent contractors to privacy to arbitration agreements - the California Legislature was busy in 2019 passing a wealth of new labor and employment laws that impact your business or agency. In this Best Best &...more
The California Supreme Court has rejected the federal Fair Labor Standards Act’s de minimis doctrine and put the burden on employers to account for “all hours worked.” Our Labor & Employment Group explains the court’s ruling...more
On July 26, 2018, the California Supreme Court issued its long-awaited opinion in Troester v. Starbucks Corp., __ P.3d __ (2018). In the days that have followed, legal headlines have lamented the presumed “death” of the de...more
On August 6, 2012, Douglas Troester, a former shift supervisor at a Starbucks location, filed a lawsuit against Starbucks in state court in Los Angeles, California. Mr. Troester filed his lawsuit on behalf of himself and a...more
Last week, in Troester v. Starbucks, a unanimous California Supreme Court held that California labor statutes and wage orders do not incorporate federal de minimis work exceptions. Yet, the Court declined to define when, if...more
In a long-awaited decision, the California Supreme Court rejected the federal de minimis doctrine, making clear that in any instance in which employees perform “minutes of work,” before or after their shifts, that time must...more
Last week, the California Supreme Court ruled in favor of a former Starbucks employee seeking compensation for time spent closing the store after clocking out. This decision in Troester v. Starbucks may limit the ability of...more
On July 26, 2018, the California Supreme Court issued its long awaited decision in Troester v. Starbucks Corporation (S234969) on whether California wage and hour law recognizes the de minimis doctrine established by the...more
• In Troester v. Starbucks Corporation, the California Supreme Court on July 26, 2018, resoundingly rejected the de minimis doctrine commonly applied under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) to claims for unpaid...more
Yesterday, the California Supreme Court issued its ruling in Troester v. Starbucks Corporation, and departed from federal law’s more employer-friendly version of the de minimis rule, which it characterized as stuck in the...more